24 ms·

We can say with relative certainty that the body fat measurements are incorrect and can be discarded. When you see glaring errors such as the assumption that th

by hodder 10y ago

We can say with relative certainty that the body fat measurements are incorrect and can be discarded. When you see glaring errors such as the assumption that the author was 5% body fat at the end of his hike,it makes you question the other metrics as well. To the authors credit he points out that bioelectrical impedance is flawed. Cool hike though!

dec0dedab0de 10y ago
As long as he used the same equipment before and after, does it matter? The Point is the change, not the exact numbers.
- kbutler 10y ago
  Hydration levels can cause it to fluctuate dramatically. Most are also calibrated for an "average" level of fitness, and state that if you are an athlete, the numbers may be inaccurate. So if he went from typical fitness to "athlete" fitness, or typical hydration to shortly-after-long-hike hydration, the error range for the second may be much wider than the first. That said, he undoubtedly lost fat. The BF% measurement change is likely not an accurate measurement of how much he lost.
- hodder 10y ago
  In this case it does matter. Hydration levels cause massive fluctuation in bioelectrical impedance testing. Also, at bodyfat levels below 15%, the numbers tend to be meaningless, even the trend in the numbers. For instance, I have a Fitbit Aria which I use to track weight. It also spits out a bodyfat number. This morning I measured 5.4%. yesterday, I measured 12.1%. Skin caliper testing, DEXA scans, or submersion chambers are the only real way to test at lower BF levels. An eyeball is better than the scale at this point. One look at someone will tell you that they are not even close to 5%. You will see significant vascularity and seperation between the muscles at that level. Only bodybuilders really tend to get there. The typical guy on a mens fitness cover wouldn't likely be under 7%.

24 ms·

We can say with relative certainty that the body fat measurements are incorrect and can be discarded. When you see glaring errors such as the assumption that th

by hodder 10y ago

dec0dedab0de 10y ago
As long as he used the same equipment before and after, does it matter? The Point is the change, not the exact numbers.
- kbutler 10y ago
  Hydration levels can cause it to fluctuate dramatically. Most are also calibrated for an "average" level of fitness, and state that if you are an athlete, the numbers may be inaccurate. So if he went from typical fitness to "athlete" fitness, or typical hydration to shortly-after-long-hike hydration, the error range for the second may be much wider than the first. That said, he undoubtedly lost fat. The BF% measurement change is likely not an accurate measurement of how much he lost.
- hodder 10y ago
  In this case it does matter. Hydration levels cause massive fluctuation in bioelectrical impedance testing. Also, at bodyfat levels below 15%, the numbers tend to be meaningless, even the trend in the numbers. For instance, I have a Fitbit Aria which I use to track weight. It also spits out a bodyfat number. This morning I measured 5.4%. yesterday, I measured 12.1%. Skin caliper testing, DEXA scans, or submersion chambers are the only real way to test at lower BF levels. An eyeball is better than the scale at this point. One look at someone will tell you that they are not even close to 5%. You will see significant vascularity and seperation between the muscles at that level. Only bodybuilders really tend to get there. The typical guy on a mens fitness cover wouldn't likely be under 7%.